501 c3 organizations must forfeit their rights as organizations, to political speech in order to retain that IRS designation. If they tried to influence voting through their 501 C3 organizations, they would be in violation of their 501 C3 status, as I understand it.
When they are speaking as individuals OUTSIDE of their organizations, then the constitutional rights kick in to protect them as persons.
I don’t know how much actual profit a church actually has, and I’m talking about actual profit. If there is no actual profit (as a business defines profit), then the tax protection afforded by the 501 C3 designation could be moot. There would be no taxes. So, why then, would a non-profit business relinquish it’s freedom of speech and influence?
Churches/assemblies/synagogs are supposed to be salt, that is, it should flavor society, flavor it to be ‘righteous’ as God defines what HE thinks is righteous. The 501 C3 status has sufficiently squelched that influence, by restricting speech. I’m not sure if 501 C3 is truly ‘constitutional’ in spirit.
Due to the changes within society which are occurring, sentiments which go against obedience and worship of God, it could prove to be in the best interests of organizations calling themselves ministries of God, to relinquish the tax protection in favor of being a ministry of God, rather than an agent of the government to squelch speech which they (the government) are calling ‘political’ rather than social.
Politics is the art of changing minds while the church seeks to change minds through the spirit...BOTH are in the ‘same’ business. The ‘protections’ of 501 C3 in effect, squelches the ‘competition’.
Now, only the government can tell people what it thinks the people should think, or do. The proof is in the demand by the mayor, and the mayor’s attorney.
This is definitely an opportunity for the PEOPLE to tell those two individuals where the dog died.
The filing DOES NOT enable the local or federal government to violate their constitutional rights under the First Amendment, which is way the pastors have legal representation. Furthermore, the mayor is clearly retaliating after the pastors organized the petition drive.
This has nothing to do with the IRS 501 c3.
There have been a couple of Freepers who have tried to highjack the discussion in an attempt to use the tax code issue as a plausible argument in this case. It is not, which is why the mayor is now backpedaling and lying about her actions.
I understand your point of view. I agree that churches should not file, but the fact that they do does not mean that they relinquish their rights as American citizens.